[todd95008]

Hi Todd,

Hard to make a firm recommendation without knowing your budget for such software.
That said, I'd suggest looking into mgalusha's recommendation of Reaper (  http://www.reaper.fm/  ).
While more of an overall digital workstation than wave editor per se, it is one of the best *sounding* applications out there and is relatively cheap compared to a number of thousand dollar, very popular vut sonically inferior apps.  (I believe you can try it for free too.)

Be aware that once you bring a FLAC file into a wave editor, you have effectively expanded it (i.e., it is no longer a FLAC file).  You would need to save the results of any processing back to FLAC is that is your desired target.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Barry

Wow, I feel honored to have my question answered by Barry !
Funny, one of the HD tracks titles I want to EQ is Bob Marley's legend. I still keep the old 1980's CD as a reference and think that in many ways it sounds better Vs the 24/96k version from HD tracks. If I recall, the original was mastered by Barry ? I will check out reaper but it may be more than I need.

Thanks
Todd

[bdiament]

Hi Todd,

Wow, I feel honored to have my question answered by Barry !
Funny, one of the HD tracks titles I want to EQ is Bob Marley's legend. I still keep the old 1980's CD as a reference and think that in many ways it sounds better Vs the 24/96k version from HD tracks. If I recall, the original was mastered by Barry ? I will check out reaper but it may be more than I need.

Thanks
Todd

Thank you for your kindness.

I did not master the original Bob Marley CD releases (on Island).  I remastered the catalog, from original tapes, in 1990 (for the Tuff Gong label).  (The ones I did have my name on the disc.)  I fortunately got permission from Island to restore 11 minutes of music on "Legend" that had been edited out of the original album versions of the songs in order to make for convenient album side lengths.  For the CD, this does not matter, so I asked and I'm glad Island (the parent of Tuff Gong) agreed.

Reaper is no doubt a lot more powerful than a simple wave editor but it also costs a lot less than any wave editor I'd recommend.  (For some reason, the good wave editors are pricey -- or perhaps it is that Reaper is exceptionally inexpensive for what it provides.)

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[todd95008]

  I remastered the catalog, from original tapes, in 1990 (for the Tuff Gong label).  (The ones I did have my name on the disc.)  I fortunately got permission from Island to restore 11 minutes of music on "Legend" that had been edited out of the original album versions of the songs in order to make for convenient album side lengths.  For the CD, this does not matter, so I asked and I'm glad Island (the parent of Tuff Gong) agreed.

Reaper is no doubt a lot more powerful than a simple wave editor but it also costs a lot less than any wave editor I'd recommend.  (For some reason, the good wave editors are pricey -- or perhaps it is that Reaper is exceptionally inexpensive for what it provides.)

Yes, it's the Tuff Gong CD I have with your name on it.
The HD tracks versions have no compression (o.k. by me) but sound overly warm if not even dull.
I was hoping for more given the following statement on HD tracks web site:

The Mastering of Bob Marley's Legend
 Mastering was completed by Kevin Reeves at Sterling Sound NYC, using the original U.S. and U.K, album masters from the Island Records vault. The masters were played on a modified Studer A820 with Wolke Butterfly heads and converted to digital at *192khz/24bit resolution using the DCS 904 converter and Sterling’s proprietary mastering systems. As always, the most direct signal path was maintained throughout the mastering process.

They sound like flat transfers with no EQ or anything else.
Tonal balance is quite different Vs your CD mastering.
I also have HD tracks version of Kaya that has a tonal balance like the CD (but even better in 24/96k).
Some of those songs are on legend but the two HD tracks versions don't sound the same.

I will download the trial of reaper and for personal use it's not too bad $60.

Thanks
Todd

[bdiament]

Hi Todd,

...They sound like flat transfers with no EQ or anything else...

In the absence of access to the masters, how could anyone know whether a transfer is flat or not?

Personally, though I have not heard the latest re-masterings, I could be wrong of course but based on my experience as an engineer and with these tapes in particular, I would tend to doubt they are flat.  (Flat transfers are *much* more rare than many audiophiles believe.  The previous sentence is an understatement.  To say masterings without compression are also rare is at least equal in understatement.)

Have fun with Reaper.  It isn't as widely known as a number of other DAW (digital audio workstation) programs but in my experience, it is among the best *sounding*.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[todd95008]

Hi Todd,

In the absence of access to the masters, how could anyone know whether a transfer is flat or not?

Personally, though I have not heard the latest re-masterings, I could be wrong of course but based on my experience as an engineer and with these tapes in particular, I would tend to doubt they are flat.  (Flat transfers are *much* more rare than many audiophiles believe.  The previous sentence is an understatement.  To say masterings without compression are also rare is at least equal in understatement.)

Best regards,
Barry

The new 24/96/192k files are transfered with a very high dynamic range (higher Vs the CD btw).
To me this is like no compression (with several dB of margin on the peaks too) and compared to your CD are a very different EQ (as I described).
I have no way of knowing what EQ if any was used or if the tapes are still in good condition etc. and so on.
I actually think that flat transfers are not the "holly grail" many audiophiles believe they are.
I also think that a small amount of compression is a good thing for rock/pop/R & B recordings.
Nothing like insane compression the "loudness wars" has introduced but what would have been used to cut on vinyl.

I wish you could hear these new transfers (22 years after yours) and judge for yourself.
That would be very interesting to me...

Todd

[bdiament]

Hi Todd,

The new 24/96/192k files are transfered with a very high dynamic range (higher Vs the CD btw).
To me this is like no compression (with several dB of margin on the peaks too) and compared to your CD are a very different EQ (as I described).
I have no way of knowing what EQ if any was used or if the tapes are still in good condition etc. and so on.
I actually think that flat transfers are not the "holly grail" many audiophiles believe they are.
I also think that a small amount of compression is a good thing for rock/pop/R & B recordings.
Nothing like insane compression the "loudness wars" has introduced but what would have been used to cut on vinyl.

I wish you could hear these new transfers (22 years after yours) and judge for yourself.
That would be very interesting to me...

Todd

I'm sure it would be interesting to hear the new transfers.  Perhaps I'll get the chance at some point.  I'm glad to hear they have their dynamics intact.  Hard for me to picture though, how the dynamic range could be wider than on the CD since I did not apply *any* compression whatsoever.  If a DR-reading program does in fact read a higher number than what is on the Tuff Gong CDs, that tells me there is an appreciable EQ difference and that there is some significant EQ on the new mastering.  (I'm not saying that is good or bad -- just making an observation based on the information I have.)


I would most certainly agree that in 99.9% of cases with recordings made in typical studios using typical studio techniques, flat transfers are not a good idea.  Quite the opposite in fact, for a great many reasons.  I say this as someone who became an engineer *after* I became an audiophile and while I still believed EQ is a terrible thing.  I just took one master (which I won't name) where I left a pain-inducing treble alone, to teach me that if I can make a recording not *hurt* by using EQ, then EQ is in fact, quite a good thing.  ;-}


Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[todd95008]

Hard for me to picture though, how the dynamic range could be wider than on the CD since I did not apply *any* compression whatsoever.  If a DR-reading program does in fact read a higher number than what is on the Tuff Gong CDs, that tells me there is an appreciable EQ difference and that there is some significant EQ on the new mastering. 

Great info Barry, hope you hang out here more often..
Here are the DR number for both versions (HD tracks added 2 more tracks so I deleted those (8 & 16) for the comparison):
_______________________________________ ________________________
Analyzed: Bob Marley & The Wailers / Legend (Remastered 24/96k HD tracks)

DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR13 -2.33 dB -17.64 dB 3:52 01-Is This Love
DR14 -0.65 dB -17.22 dB 7:10 02-No Woman, No Cry (1975 - Live)
DR14 -1.11 dB -16.53 dB 3:57 03-Could You Be Loved
DR14 -0.98 dB -16.53 dB 3:01 04-Three Little Birds
DR13 -1.13 dB -15.83 dB 4:18 05-Buffalo Soldier
DR13 -4.42 dB -18.87 dB 3:18 06-Get Up, Stand Up
DR13 -1.48 dB -16.11 dB 5:31 07-Stir It Up (Original Album Version)
DR14 -3.19 dB -19.03 dB 2:52 09-One Love / People Get Ready
DR13 -2.53 dB -17.56 dB 4:42 10-I Shot The Sheriff
DR15 -0.53 dB -16.82 dB 4:12 11-Waiting In Vain
DR13 -2.90 dB -19.66 dB 3:47 12-Redemption Song
DR16 -1.73 dB -20.54 dB 4:32 13-Satisfy My Soul
DR14 -1.03 dB -17.30 dB 7:41 14-Exodus
DR14 -0.96 dB -16.12 dB 3:32 15-Jamming
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 14
Official DR value: DR14

Samplerate: 96000 Hz, Bits per sample: 24, Channels: 2
Bitrate: 2815 kbps
Codec: FLAC

===============================================
Analyzed: : Bob Marley & The Wailers / Legend (Tuff Gong, Barry Diament mastering)

DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR12      -0.64 dB   -15.79 dB      3:52 ?-01-Is This Love
DR13       0.00 dB   -15.64 dB      7:07 ?-02-No Woman No Cry
DR14      -0.73 dB   -16.09 dB      3:55 ?-03-Could You Be Loved
DR14      -0.23 dB   -15.93 dB      3:00 ?-04-Three Little Birds
DR14      -0.24 dB   -15.45 dB      4:17 ?-05-Buffalo Soldier
DR12      -0.80 dB   -15.42 dB      3:17 ?-06-Get up Stand Up
DR11      -2.28 dB   -15.54 dB      5:34 ?-07-Stir It Up
DR14      -0.85 dB   -16.59 dB      2:52 ?-08-One Love _ People Get Ready
DR12      -1.34 dB   -15.92 dB      4:41 ?-09-I Shot the Sheriff
DR13      -0.94 dB   -16.20 dB      4:16 ?-10-Waiting in Vain
DR13      -2.37 dB   -19.62 dB      3:49 ?-11-Redemption Song
DR15       0.00 dB   -17.67 dB      4:32 ?-12-Satisfy My Soul
DR14      -0.70 dB   -16.68 dB      7:35 ?-13-Exodus
DR14      -0.60 dB   -15.34 dB      3:31 ?-14-Jamming
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks:  14
Official DR value: DR13

Samplerate: 44100 Hz, Bits per sample: 16, Channels:  2
Bitrate: 1411 kbps
Codec:  PCM


Looks like your version is a little hotter and just has more "life" to it !!

Todd